Tuesday, May 31, 2016

"Redskins" controversy rumbles on

Inconvenient public opinion polls must be denounced

The Washington Post poll that supporters of the local NFL team’s name believed would end the debate has potentially reinvigorated it — along with sparking a new debate over whether there should even be a debate about the propriety of the name.

On Friday, a group of Native American leaders and activists (i.e., not “white liberal journalists”) held a conference call aimed at further criticizing the poll.

Via the Associated Press, California State San Bernardino sociology professor James Fenelon called the poll “immoral.” He also echoed concerns that the poll was not representative of Native American communities. Likewise, Amanda Blackhorse, who serves as the lead plaintiff in the case attacking the team’s federal trademark protection, called the poll “misguided,” adding that it won’t diminish attacks against the name.

“This issue is not about polling,” National Congress of American Indians executive director Jackie Pata added. “This issue is about human rights.”

Some would say that these voices carry much more weight that 450 unverified self-identifying Native American adults who said in response to a series of questions about the name that the name doesn’t bother them.

No prizes for guessing that a white conservative did not put the noose there

According to NBC5 Chicago, DePaul University officials are investigating reports of a noose found on their Lincoln Park campus Thursday. The university sent out an e-mail alert to students, notifying them of the “horrific symbol of racist intimidation” that was discovered.

“These reports are being investigated and those found to be responsible will be held accountable,” the alert read.

The noose turned up a few days after a group of Black Lives Matter activists disrupted the speech of a blogger infamous for his conservative views, DNAinfo.com reports. The entire ordeal was caught on tape.

Footage shows Breitbart editor Milo Yiannopoulos in the middle of speaking at a DePaul College Republicans event Tuesday when a demonstrator burst into the room blowing a whistle. “This man is an idiot,” the protester shouted to the crowd. According to DNAinfo.com, chaos ensued when more protesters hopped on stage with

Surprisingly, security never stepped in to stop the chaos, the news site reports.

Monday, May 30, 2016

Native American writer Nicole Robertson objected to the Republican candidate’s continued use of the term “Pocahontas” to ridicule U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren.

As reported by Inforum, Trump made the aforementioned derogatory comment during a campaign stop in Bismarck, North Dakota on Thursday.

When Robertson, a member of the Cree Nation, told the Republican front-runner that she was offended by the remark, Trump apologized – before immediately referring to Warren as “Pocahontas” once again

Donald Trump’s comments about Elizabeth Warren stem from a 2012 controversy regarding the Massachusetts Senator’s ancestry. As previously reported by Inquisitr, Warren has stated that she is of Cherokee descent, but the claim has proven difficult to document.

A legendary Native American historical figure, the story of Pocahontas was also adapted for a popular animated film by Disney.

A Chinese laundry detergent company is under fire over a new commercial which many have interpreted as racist.

The new commercial for laundry detergent brand Qiaobi shows a Chinese woman shoving a black man into her washing machine with one of the company's detergent pods and the man emerging as a light-skinned Chinese man.

The commercial reportedly started airing this month in China on TV and at Wanda Theaters and quickly spread online.

The shocking commercial begins with a Chinese woman walking up to her washing machine to start a load of laundry, when a dark-skinned African laborer holding a paint brush and wearing a stained white shirt enters the room and whistles at her in a flirtatious fashion.

The Chinese woman motions for him to come closer and the black man approaches as if to to kiss the woman. But at the last second, she feeds him a laundry pod and then shoves him head first into the washing machine.

She then slams the top of the washing machine shut and starts the cycle, jumping up on the appliance with a smile on her face as the man screams and groans from inside.

When the cycle ends, the woman opens the top of the machine and a cleaner, light-skinned, Chinese man emerges to her delight.

The commercial ends with the 'improved' man holding up one of the laundry pods and a picture of the detergent box appearing on the screen.

As the Shanghaiist points out, this commercial is reflective of Chinese ideals for white skin.

'Thanks to traditional beauty standards valuing white skin, many Chinese people have a well-established phobia of dark skin which unfortunately also breeds racist attitudes towards people of African descent, who are viewed by some as "dirty" simply because of their skin tone,' the website wrote.

Friday, May 27, 2016

State Rep. Kenny Havard said Thursday he won’t apologize over his “joke” legislation that sought to ban exotic dancers from being overweight or older than 28 years.

He took a firm stand on Thursday, despite numerous demands he apologize, blaming the firestorm his comments created on the delicate sensibilities of a nation that he said is overly concerned with being politically correct.

Throughout the day Thursday, legislators openly castigated Havard for what they described as foolish, insulting and offensive behavior which they said has cast an unfortunate shadow over the Legislature. Gov. John Bel Edwards called the move “unfortunate” and “not funny,” while other legislators — male and female — said Havard’s comments were hurtful to women.

On Wednesday, the House chamber debated a bill to raise the age of strip club dancers from 18 to 21. Havard attached a formal amendment to the bill — which he quickly withdrew in the face of opposition — that would have mandated dancers could not be older than 28 years old and weigh more than 160 pounds.

The action quickly drew the ire of women legislators who said his bill was emblematic of casual sexism frequently displayed in the State Capitol.

Havard on Thursday denied that his amendment was directed at women. He maintained he was trying to make an example about how the Legislature is overregulating businesses. He voted favorably for the bill.

A mural in Elgin that has been in place for 10 years and was modeled after the photograph of a lynching, has raised questions about its origin.

A controversial mural that depicts a crowd watching a 1930 lynching will move to the Hemmens Cultural Center, Kristine Rogowski, Elgin communications director, said Friday.

Councilwoman Tish Powell said the decision was made Friday afternoon to move the mural to Hemmens sooner rather than later.

A number of factors contributed to the decision to move it, including the threat of vandalism and how some are interpreting and reacting to the piece.

"We want to encourage people to come to the two meetings we have set up to talk about the mural," Powell said.

Elgin may have dropped the ball in not noting the meaning of the city-commissioned work when it was first put on exhibit more than 10 years ago, Powell said.

Elgin City Manager Sean Stegall, who was assistant city manager at the time of the commission, said he could not recall discussion of matters related to the content of the works of art.

The artist behind the Elgin mural that depicts a portion of a famous photo of a lynching of two black men in Indiana said the piece was intended to get people to ask questions, think about issues and consider their own place in history.

"The idea here was talking about lynching, asking questions, the history," artist David Powers said. "You don't want to be on that wall with these monsters. Anywhere. In any town."

Thursday, May 26, 2016

Local police and the school superintendent are investigating the discovery of racist graffiti found inside Newburyport High School this morning around 8 a.m.

According to police, the single racially vulgar word targeting African-Americans was found scrawled in pencil on an elevator. A high school staff member reported the word to Principal Michael Parent.

It appears the word, about 2 inches in size and written very sloppily, was there for some time before being noticed. Posters and notices had been placed partially covering the slur, and it was uncovered after posted materials were removed.

The message was documented and removed, and the Newburyport Police Department was notified and is investigating. The message did not contain any threats and did not target a specific person.

“Though this appears to be an isolated incident, I am very disappointed that someone would write a racist remark in the high school. Newburyport has a progressive and inclusive school system, and this kind of ignorance sends an unwelcoming message to others,” Superintendent Susan Viccaro said.

The School Department is working with Mayor Donna Holaday’s Commission for Diversity and Tolerance to determine an educational and corrective course of action to prevent such acts of intolerance in the future.

An email detailing the incident and the department’s investigation is expected to be sent to parents this afternoon, according to a police spokesman.

Local police and the school superintendent are investigating the discovery of racist graffiti found inside Newburyport High School this morning around 8 a.m.

According to police, the single racially vulgar word targeting African-Americans was found scrawled in pencil on an elevator. A high school staff member reported the word to Principal Michael Parent.

It appears the word, about 2 inches in size and written very sloppily, was there for some time before being noticed. Posters and notices had been placed partially covering the slur, and it was uncovered after posted materials were removed.

The message was documented and removed, and the Newburyport Police Department was notified and is investigating. The message did not contain any threats and did not target a specific person.

“Though this appears to be an isolated incident, I am very disappointed that someone would write a racist remark in the high school. Newburyport has a progressive and inclusive school system, and this kind of ignorance sends an unwelcoming message to others,” Superintendent Susan Viccaro said.

The School Department is working with Mayor Donna Holaday’s Commission for Diversity and Tolerance to determine an educational and corrective course of action to prevent such acts of intolerance in the future.

An email detailing the incident and the department’s investigation is expected to be sent to parents this afternoon, according to a police spokesman.

Wednesday, May 25, 2016

White House drug czar Michael Botticelli said Thursday that using “terms like abuser and addict” to describe people with drug addictions makes it less likely that they will get treatment.

“Funding isn’t our only barrier to expanding treatment. We also have an enormous hurdle to overcome, and that’s shame and stigma,” Botticelli said.

“Stigma is an obstacle for people reaching out, reaching recovery, and living healthy and productive lives. That’s because stigma breeds prejudice, discrimination. It alienates and isolates people. It prevents them from accessing treatment and even seeking it in the first place. It says you should be ashamed because you have a disease,” he said.

“In fact, research has shown that when we use terms like abuser and addict to describe someone with a substance use disorder, that person is actually less likely to be offered treatment or to receive treatment, and often contributes to negative public policy,” he said, adding “and this stigma extends to other aspects of recovery, including housing and employment opportunities so needed for people to be stable in their recovery. “

THE European Court of Justice ruled yesterday that the European Union can lawfully suppress political criticism of its institutions and of leading figures, sweeping aside English Common Law and 50 years of European precedents on civil liberties.

The EU's top court found that the European Commission was entitled to sack Bernard Connolly, a British economist dismissed in 1995 for writing a critique of European monetary integration entitled The Rotten Heart of Europe.

The ruling stated that the commission could restrict dissent in order to "protect the rights of others" and punish individuals who "damaged the institution's image and reputation".

The case has wider implications for free speech that could extend to EU citizens who do not work for the Brussels bureaucracy.

Mr Colomer wrote in his opinion last November that a landmark British case on free speech had "no foundation or relevance" in European law, suggesting that the European Court was unwilling to give much consideration to British legal tradition.

Mr Connolly now intends to take his case to Europe's other court, the non-EU European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.

Tuesday, May 24, 2016

"Redskins": Liberals Told Us This Was a Racist Crisis. It Turns Out No One Really Cares

The economy is in the tank, America's enemies are on the march, and what are liberals worried about? The names of American football teams and the ability of perverts to access women's bathrooms where they can peep on children.

Americans care very much about the latter, but it turns out that no one cares at all about the former. As Fox News notes: "A recent national poll found that nine of 10 Native Americans aren't offended by the Washington Redskins name".

The poll conducted by the Washington Post indicated more than eight in 10 said they wouldn't be offended if someone who was not a Native American called them that name.

A federal judge ordered the cancellation of the Washington Redskins' trademark registration in July, ruling that their name may be disparaging to Native Americans. The club is appealing.

Ninety percent of the random national sample of 504 Native Americans said the name doesn't bother them; 9 percent said it was offensive. Native Americans make up about 2 percent of the U.S. population.

Of course Native Americans are indifferent. They, like millions of other Americans, have many other things to worry about

With the growth on college campuses in trigger warnings and safe spaces, shouting down speakers and blocking student journalists from public property, Prof. Dale Carpenter decided that the U of M could use a refresher in free speech.

He drafted a set of four “core principles” reaffirming what free speech is and how the U should uphold it. “Ideas are the lifeblood of a free society and universities are its beating heart,” Carpenter wrote. “If freedom of speech is undermined on a university campus, it is not safe anywhere.”

The four principles, which are modeled after the University of Chicago’s famous “Chicago principles” in defense of free speech, are:

1. A public university must be absolutely committed to protecting free speech, both for constitutional and academic reasons.

2. Free speech includes protection for speech that some find offensive, uncivil, or even hateful.

3. Free speech cannot be regulated on the ground that some speakers are thought to have more power or more access to the mediums of speech than others.

4. Even when protecting free speech conflicts with other important University values, free speech must be paramount.

Other universities like Princeton, Purdue, and Yale have adopted close versions of these codes. The U of M, however, has had a particularly difficult time getting behind them.

The Student Senate, Council of Graduate Students, and at least one faculty member have wrangled over the principles for months. As a result, Carpenter’s proposal has been tabled for the remainder of the academic year.

In March, the Council of Graduate Students wrote an official letter in opposition, calling the wording “tone-deaf,” “ill-advised,” and “deplorably patronizing.”

The group would prefer the University regulate speech by giving “special consideration to otherwise marginalized speakers.”

Jonathan Borowsky, spokesman for the Council of Graduate Students, explained that's not to say that the powerful and privileged should be shut down. Rather, the University should be expected to assume the responsibility of offering special opportunities for those who are not well-spoken or who use English as a second language to express themselves as well. Soliciting those students' thoughts could be a form of good "regulation," Borowsky says.

"We were trying to communicate that this proposal was really problematic even though we agreed with parts of it," he says. "People found it offensive. What people heard was there's just one right way to speak, and it contributed to an atmosphere where many felt like their views weren't welcome. So we sent a letter objecting to the free speech document, but also supporting free speech."

The grad students also took issue with the fourth principle, which urges students to fight speech with which they disagree using counter-speech instead of censorship. “The most effective response to offensive ideas is to rebut them with better ideas,” Carpenter proposed. “Speakers are themselves subject to criticism from within the community for the substance of their ideas and the tone of their words.”

This too was insulting.

“Some community members may believe that their points of view are habitually ignored, regardless of the quality of their ideas, due to racism or other prejudice, cultural difference, or differences in power,” the Council of Graduate Students responded. “These sentences, with no context or specificity, presume to know the best way for people to advocate for themselves.”

When members of the Student Senate discussed the core principles, they were also split on similar concerns of whether speech should be free even when it’s hateful, and whether reaffirming free speech is even necessary when everyone’s trying to “evolve intellectually in order to have hard conversations about such things as race and equality.”

Within the faculty ranks, engineering Prof. Catherine French also argued against free speech so long as hate speech is included in freedom of expression.

In the end, though faculty voted to support the core principles, students spoke up in opposition during the full University Senate meeting last week. The University Senate did not vote on the proposal, and will not meet again until the fall.

Ray Badran says he received death threats online from a joke he told involving the word rape.

That was one of the first tweets that Ray Badran received last year that make him realise something wasn’t right.

A few nights earlier, the Sydney stand-up comedian had been confronted by an audience member at a warm-up gig for last year’s Melbourne International Comedy Festival after she objected to a joke he made using the word “rape”.

In what Badran considers one of his worst gigs, he ended up walking off stage frustrated and saying “f**k off and die”.

The joke goes something like this: “If you’re black you can do jokes about being black, if you’re gay you can do jokes about being gay … so I’m not sure if you can tell just by looking at me but … I can do rape jokes.”

Badran estimates he had told the joke to about 50,000 people before that Melbourne gig last year without any complaints.

Sunday, May 22, 2016

'Luvvie' is as bad as the N-word(?)

(In both Britain and Australia, "Luvvie" refers to the influential clique in the entertainment and literary industry. Their views are strongly Leftist and they are very sure about what is right and wrong. They don't think much of ordinary people either. They are happily elitist)

Calling actors ‘luvvies’ is as offensive as using racial slurs, Tom Conti said yesterday.

The 74-year-old star was backed by fellow veterans of the stage and screen Peter Egan and Dame Janet Suzman.

The three have become embroiled in an astonishing war of words with a Labour councillor after he called celebrities ‘livid luvvies’ for protesting about plans for a new supermarket in north-west London.

Shirley Valentine star Conti, who lives in a £17.5million mansion in Hampstead, told the Daily Mail that to use the word ‘luvvies’ was ‘as abusive as “Yid” or “n*****” and it’s a horrible expression.

The row began after councillor Theo Blackwell wrote to his local newspaper citing the endless complaints from well-heeled residents in the area, including Oscar-winning actress Emma Thompson.

He noted that they attacked plans from Tesco or Sainsbury’s but did not care about setting up ‘roadblocks’ to stop Ocado delivery drivers. Mr Blackwell also accused the same campaigners of making ‘spurious claims against the new Cycle Superhighway route’.

And he ended his letter by stating: ‘So let’s have less of the “livid luvvie” protests – not everyone locally thinks the same on all these issues.’

On Sunday, I stood singing with thousands of my fellow Celtic supporters in Celtic Park. It wasn’t just because our team were being presented with the League Championship trophy (our fifth title in a row) or even because the sun was actually shining in Glasgow. No, many of us were bouncing because it now looks likely that the Offensive Behaviour at Football Act (OBFA), which has criminalised hundreds of football fans for singing ‘offensive’ songs, is set to become the first major battle of the new Scottish parliament.

Put another way, it looks like the OBFA is going to be scrapped. The Conservatives, Labour, the Greens and the Lib Dems all oppose the legislation, meaning that the Scottish National Party (SNP) – which introduced the legislation in 2012 – is outnumbered in the Scottish parliament by 65 to 63 seats. The failure of the SNP to secure an overall majority in the Scottish elections means that the legislation is now extremely vulnerable.

We shouldn’t be under any illusions. When it comes to civil liberties, these parties can be every bit as illiberal as the SNP. Nonetheless, the removal of this toxic legislation from the statute books would be huge victory for those of us who have fought long and hard against the OBFA.

Under the OBFA, you can be sent to prison for five years for singing a song that a police officer deems offensive, either at a match, on the way to or from a match, or even in a video posted online. There is no objective definition of what constitutes an offensive comment or song – it is an entirely subjective law.

Instead, the police are left to decide what is and isn’t offensive. As a result, Dundee United supporters have appeared in court for calling Aberdeen fans ‘sheep-shaggers’ online; Celtic fans have ended up in police cells overnight for singing Irish republican songs; and Rangers fans have been sent to prison simply for writing and singing naughty things about Celtic supporters and Irish Catholics.

The overwhelming majority of people dragged before the courts under the OBFA have been working-class young men. This means that hundreds of young men have ended up with criminal records, have lost their jobs and, as a result, are unable to apply for all sorts of jobs in the future.

Friday, May 20, 2016

Must not mention that there are a lot of Muslim suicide bombers

The leader of Italy’s second-largest political party was performing at a show in Padua on Saturday when he praised the victory in the mayoral election of "Bangladeshi" Khan, who is British and whose family are originally from Pakistan.

The comedian noted that London's first Muslim mayor is an example of what unthinkable surprises life can hold in store and as proof that one must never stop dreaming, only to proceed to joke: "Now I want to see when he blows himself up in Westminster."

The remark by the leader of the Five Star Movement (M5S), an anti-establishment party founded by Mr Grillo in 2009, came at a sensitive time as his own party’s candidate, Virginia Raggi, is the leading contender to become the next mayor of Rome.

Stefano Esposito, a PD senator, demanded to know what the mayoral candidate Raggi thought of the joke: “What does Raggi think of the racist insult that her boss directed at the mayor of London?

Same question asked by Ettore Rosato, the PD's leader in Parliament: "Racism and generalisation by Beppe Grillo is not funny and offend integrated people and free voters. What does Virginia Raggi say about Westminster?"

Blake Lively thought she was being funny with an Instagram post, but a lot of people aren't laughing.

On May 17, the expectant mother shared a split photo of herself on Instagram while donning an elegant gold Atelier Versace dress. One of the images showed her from the front, looking stunning, her baby bump just starting to show. The other image of the split showed her from the back, showing off her derrière.

"L.A. face with an Oakland booty," she captioned the side by side post of her on a Cannes red carpet, where she has been effectively owning the film festival in the South of France.

The post has enraged many of her 8 million Instagram followers (and many others), as they felt that she is toeing the line of racism.

To be fair, some fans found the humor in Blake quoting lyrics from Sir Mix-a-Lot's 1992 curvy-girl anthem "Baby Got Back," in which he fondly raps about a woman's backside. Others, though, felt she was being intensive and they filled her Instagram with their displeasure.

"Unbelievably problematic," one person commented, "using women of color's bodies as a joke. I guess you just want people to know you're racist and you don't give a s---."

Another said Blake's caption "is pure racism and sadly no white folks will ever understand that. Nice bodies have no geographical nor ethnic limitations. She should be ashamed of herself and how much do you want to bet she's never stepped foot in Oakland in her privileged life?"

Thursday, May 19, 2016

A giant billboard on a major freeway in Murrieta, California is stirring up controversy, with a local high school student launching a petition to have it taken down.

The billboard features two takeaway coffee cups — a smaller one labelled ‘B’ and a larger one labelled ‘D’ — with the phrase “size matters” separating the two.

The sign was erected by plastic surgeon Brian Eichenberg back in January to advertise his most popular procedure — breast augmentation. He argues the ad is really just about prompting a discussion.

But it didn’t sit too well with 15-year-old Anna Gorski, who launched a Change.org petition three weeks ago to have it removed and is swiftly gaining hundreds of signatures.

“It’s degrading, it objectifies women’s bodies ... it’s not as harmless as he thought it was ... hundreds of people take it to heart, I think it’s offensive,” Ms Gorski says. “I don’t think size matters. I don’t think a billboard should be telling me that size matters.”

Dr Eichenberg said the divisive billboard has generated plenty of publicity for the company.

Though a federal judge recently ruled that a conservative nonprofit group doesn’t have to disclose its donor list to California’s Democratic attorney general, conservatives believe this case is just the latest in an ongoing fight related to political activity and free speech.

“This was a great victory for free speech for everyone in this country,” said Mark Holden, the general counsel for Koch Industries, and a board member of Americans for Prosperity, the group asked to disclose its donor list.

“This effort to chill our right to the First Amendment is critical to what the left’s whole agenda is,” Holden told The Daily Signal in an interview. “They talk about getting big money out of politics, but what they really mean is going after speech and activity they disagree with, made by groups they disagree with.”

But the legal fight is not over, because Harris intends to challenge the decision with the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

The case centers around Harris’ aim to enforce a California state law that requires charities, such as Americans for Prosperity, to file a copy of their IRS tax return with the state, including a so-called Schedule B form that includes the names and addresses of donors who donated more than $5,000 during a year.

In his order, Real said Harris had failed to prove that the state needs donor information to properly investigate charities active in California.

Wednesday, May 18, 2016

Leftist Hate speech Hoax now admitted

The Texas man who sued Whole Foods Market for allegedly writing an anti-gay slur on his cake has admitted that it was a hoax. Jordan Brown dropped his lawsuit against Whole Foods and has now apologized.

Brown alleged that he went to Whole Foods Market and bought a cake and had a bakery associate write “Love Wins” on it. He then claimed the associate wrote a homophobic slur instead.

From Fox News:

The Texas pastor who sued Whole Foods in April for allegedly writing a gay slur on a cake he bought withdrew his lawsuit on Monday and apologized to the supermarket chain for perpetrating a hoax, KVUE reported.

"The company did nothing wrong," openly gay pastor Jordan Brown wrote in a Monday statement. "I was wrong to pursue this matter and use the media to perpetuate this story."

Brown said in April that he requested a cake from Whole Foods with the phrase “Love Wins” written on it, but when he received his cake there was a homophobic remark added. Brown made the accusation in an Internet video and launched a lawsuit shortly thereafter.

But alert viewers quickly pointed out that the icing style used to write “Love Wins” and the gay slur appeared to differ, and Whole Foods released surveillance video showing the cake being purchased with the UPC code in a different location than Brown's video, suggesting the cake had been opened and tampered with.

The baker who sold Brown the cake is gay. A subsequent internal Whole Foods investigation cleared him of the allegations.

Brown did say why made up the story. Whole Foods has countersued Brown and there’s no word if they have dropped their own countersuit.

Hopefully, Whole Foods continues its suit against Brown. There has to be a public example made of those who invent these types of hoaxes.

Pretty obvious that it is another hoax. The modus operandi is familiar

A Catholic school in Tyngsboro is canceling classes tomorrow after a typed note threatening black students at the school was found in a bathroom, police said.

This follows “a series of racist and racially insensitive social media postings” targeting students at the Academy of Notre Dame, a kindergarten to high school.

“We do not believe there is a credible threat against the school, but we are conducting an active and ongoing investigation at this time,” Tyngsboro police Chief Richard D. Howe said.

Other offensive messages have been posted to Instagram and Twitter, targeting the Upper School, over the past several months, police said. Investigators are reaching out to officials at Twitter as well as Facebook, which owns Instagram. Police first opened an investigation into the social media postings in February, and the investigation remains ongoing. The typed and printed message is the first piece of physical evidence presented to police.

Tuesday, May 17, 2016

An incredibly powerful image of a father cradling his sick son in the shower has garnered an outpouring of support despite it being removed by Facebook more than once.

The moment was captured by Heather Whitten in November 2014 as her husband, Thomas, comforted their son Fox who was hospitalized for salmonella poisoning after the photo was taken.

Whitten recalled the moment in a Facebook post earlier this month, writing that her husband had spent hours in the shower with Fox as he tried to keep their son's fever down, and as the water rinsed the vomit and diarrhea off of them both as it came.

The mother-of-four, who is a photographer, lives with her husband and children in Southern Arizona and described it as 'a powerful moment for us as parents,' according to The Mirror.

'As I sat in the shower with the two of them I was just overwhelmed with the scene in front of me,' she wrote.

'This man. This husband and partner and father. He was so patient and so loving and so strong with our tiny son in his lap.

'His whispers of reassurance to Fox, that he would be ok and that Thomas would take care of him were so steady and so honest.'

But she noted that while the photo depicted a special moment for them as parents, people were quick to comment on the nudity in the photo. 'I was taken aback by how many people missed the story or didn't even look past the nudity to find the story,' she wrote.

'They were just hung up on them both being nude and being in the shower. I had crossed a line. It was too intimate. It shouldn't be shared publicly. But, I disagree.

'My family may be different than yours. But, that doesn't make your way right or my way wrong.'

American neuroses about race have not yet totally spread to Australia. It seems to be a common thing among Caucasian populations to find blackface funny. But you have to be careful about what you laugh at these days

VICTORIA’S Frankston Bombers football club is in hot water after posting images of teammates in blackface on social media, with calls for an inquiry into the matter by the Mornington Peninsula Nepean Football League.

When approached for comment the club’s president Chris Sharman attempted to downplay the incident.

“There was nothing racist about Saturday’s event. We ran an iPod Shuffle Night where everyone dressed up as their favourite musicians,” he said.

Monday, May 16, 2016

Must not compare Mrs Trump and Mrs Obama

He's got a point. The beauty ideal worldwide is Nordic. Even some Japanese ladies blond their hair. And Mrs Obama herself straightens her hair. So Mrs Tump, with her blue eyes and straight fair hair has it made, whereas Mrs Obama is a very long way from that ideal. And one wonders if even blacks think black is beautiful: Black men have a well-known preference for white women

A cartoonist has been accused of racism after he portrayed Michelle Obama as masculine and butch next to a pageant-ready Melania Trump in a controversial drawing.

The cartoon - which has been branded 'racist and misogynistic' - shows a muscular Mrs Obama wearing a green dress with a bulge in the groin area.

Stood next to her is a feminine, smiling Melania Trump in a pink dress and holding a Trump sign.

The artist Ben Garrison tweeted the picture on Friday with the caption: '#InTrumpsAmerica The #FirstLady will be Great Again!

Twitter reacted with fury to the drawing, with dozens of people defending the First Lady.

Femi H tweeted: 'Honestly this is racist as hell and reverts back to stereotypes that black women are angry and masculine.'

The annual varsity sporting tournament between the University of Sheffield and Sheffield Hallam University is a big event – and the foul-mouthed chants that are exchanged between each side are a big part of what makes it so enjoyable. They’re part of a ritual that everyone loves.

And, as happens with every other fun thing on campus, a couple of Sheffield students’ union officers have decided to try and get them banned. A motion calling for the ‘classist’ and ‘sexist’ chants to be banned is being debated by the SU council tomorrow.

Now, like all sports chants, the varsity songs are pretty robust: ‘The wheels on your house go round and round’, which Sheffield students chant at the Sheffield Hallam end, is one example; ‘I’d rather be a poly than a cunt’, which is fired back in response, is another.

But I’ve never heard of anyone being upset by these chants. Partly because everyone who goes to a varsity match knows what’s coming. But mainly because we’re all adults.

But, from their union offices, Sheffield’s student-political clique has taken it upon itself to tell the student body, and its many sports fans, what they can and cannot chant.

Sunday, May 15, 2016

Parents have slammed Sainsbury's for selling a girls' T-shirt emblazoned with the slogan 'Selfie Queen'.

One mother, who goes by the username westcountrywoman on Mumsnet, posted a photograph of the 'offensive' garment which quickly sparked a heated debate.

One user, nicknamed MyKingdomForBrie, said she was appalled by the T-shirt designed for age three, writing: 'Horrible message for girls, pretty bloody depressing as is the whole culture surrounding it.'

Others blasted the design for being 'cringe-worthy', 'tacky' and 'sexist'.

However, despite the backlash, many parents said they did not find the 'Selfie Queen' T-shirt offensive. 'I wouldn't say inappropriate, just a bit naff really,' Pixilicious wrote, while WorraLiberty added: 'We're living in an age where selfies are very common/popular so it's just a silly little slogan that gives a nod to that.'

And it appears that many others are also in support of the slogan.

Indeed, a spokesperson for Sainsbury's told MailOnline that the 'Selfie Queen' T-shirt - made for ages three to 12 - is 'very popular' and 'lots of people like it.'

Defending the design, the retail chain said: 'Children love playing with cameras and taking selfies. 'The T-shirt was designed to be a fun, playful addition to our kidswear range and is popular with parents.'

Police Scotland are at it again. Not content with arresting Scots for writing Facebook statuses, or imprisoning Scots for singing songs in Glasgow, or warning Scots that those writing supposedly offensive tweets could be faced with a police visit, our petty commissars are now arresting Scots who post silly videos of their dogs on the internet.

In the video, the dog is seen raising his paw after Markus Meechan says ‘Sieg Heil’ at it. The video is not particularly clever or funny, but is it really worthy of a night behind bars?

Absolutely not. But so long as Police Scotland retain their censorious edge, and class anything mildly offensive as a hate crime, such silliness is bound to land someone in jail.

Scots are sick of the police chasing after people who are only guilty of being a bit rude while serious crimes escape investigation. This, mixed with many examples of their own incompetence, has meant that public confidence in Police Scotland has been consistently dropping since the unified force was created.

In response to his arrest, Meechan remarked: ‘I just want everyone to know that I don’t wish any ill-will on any race or anything, it’s just how shock comedy works.’

In justifying the decision, Detective Inspector David Cockburn said: ‘This arrest should serve as a warning to anyone posting such material online, or in any other capacity, that such views will not be tolerated'

Friday, May 13, 2016

AN ADVERT for “designer vagina” surgery has been banned over concerns it could make women unhappy with their bodies.

The ad — which appeared in London’s Metro newspaper — was for labia reshaping at the London Bridge Plastic Surgery clinic offering women the chance to “achieve a more natural appearance”.

It was canned after five readers blasted it as socially irresponsible and encouraging women to have unnecessary cosmetic surgery.

The surgery said 100 per cent of women undergoing the op were looking for a more “natural” appearance — while 91 per cent reported discomfort from clothing, 69 per cent discomfort when doing sports and a significant number reported discomfort during sex.

The clinic denied it was wrong to advertise the availability of such surgery.

The Metro said it considered the advert to be suitable because it is read by young professionals with plenty of cash who would not take offence at that type of promotion.

But watchdog the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) said the description hinted that a pre-surgery labia might be somehow “unnatural” in appearance and banned the ad in its current form.

The London Bridge Plastic Surgery clinic added: “We never impose on our patients our views of what natural is and never tell a patient what is normal. “It is our patients who ask for a more natural or normal appearance and it is our role to tell them what or what is not possible.

Floyd Abrams Speaks Freely to Political Correctness on America’s Campuses

First Amendment expert warns efforts to block or suppress political speech will get worse before they get better

If you ask judges and lawyers to blurt the name that comes to mind when given the verbal prompt “First Amendment,” a fair percentage will reply “Floyd Abrams.” Since being asked by The New York Times to defend its right to publish the Pentagon Papers 45 years ago, the 80-year-old partner at the New York law firm Cahill Gordon & Reindel has become, as the late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan put it, “the most significant First Amendment lawyer of our age.” He has been asked by ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN and Time Magazine, among others, to represent them in high stakes constitutional litigation, with clients as diverse as the Brooklyn Museum of Art, National Public Radio commentator Nina Totenberg, Al Franken and Senator Mitch McConnell.

So it got some attention when Mr. Abrams, disgusted by the proliferating problem of coerced disinvitations of speakers from college campuses and the shouting down of speakers whom a determined minority of students wish to prevent their fellow students from hearing, decided to speak out. In lectures delivered a year ago at Temple University in Philadelphia and a few weeks ago at the University of Iowa, Mr. Abrams declared that the greatest threat to American free speech presently comes not from government’s mega-sophisticated electronic surveillance techniques, but from within academia—principally from “a minority of students who strenuously and, I think it is fair to say, contemptuously, disapprove of the views of speakers whose view of the world is different from theirs, and who seek to prevent those views from being heard.”

Mr. Abrams notes that it used to be that those guilty of suppressing speech on campus were university administrators, who felt threatened by campus speakers whose positions on political or social issues departed sharply from their own, and who didn’t want students to hear them. Now the ones trying to prevent students from hearing political and social viewpoints are other students.

“There’s simply too much suppression of speech by students who don’t want to hear or have others hear what they don’t think should be said,” Mr. Abrams says. “It occurred to me that if I had to identify one ongoing threat with respect to the First Amendment it was campus intolerance to speech and campus willingness to ban or prevent speech of which students disapprove.”

Thursday, May 12, 2016

Police were today accused of 'bowing to political correctness' after issuing a grovelling apology for allowing a mock suicide bomber to scream 'Allahu Akbar' during a terror training exercise.

Greater Manchester Police were preparing officers for a 'Daesh style' extremist assault similar to those that killed hundreds in Paris and Brussels.

Footage of the terror exercise showed a masked 'suicide bomber' storming into the Trafford Centre and yelling 'God is great' in Arabic before fireworks exploded representing his suicide belt being detonated, while 800 bloody volunteers acted out being killed or injured as armed officers swept the mall for other jihadis.

But within hours the force issued a humbling apology after being accused of Islamophobia for assuming terrorists would be Muslim.

The decision to apologise has backfired, with Twitter outraged by the constabulary's political correctness, saying they were right to make the exercise as similar to previous ISIS planned attacks such as Belgium and Paris as possible.

A NEW chocolate-flavoured ice cream created by a Russian company has faced criticism after from American commentators over its controversial name.

The ‘Obamka’ ice cream bar hit shelves in the city of Naberezhnye Chelny in late April, according to the Moscow Times.

The -ka suffix in Russian is used to designate something as small, so the name translates to 'Little Obama', Reuters reports.

The sweet treat, produced by Slavista, is a vanilla ice cream bar coated in chocolate and comes in a wrapper that "features an image of a smiling young African boy, wearing an ear ring and holding an ice cream".

Rasil Mustafin, deputy development director at the Slavista ice cream factory, claims the name of the product isn’t political at all, but was chosen due to the ice cream's chocolate flavour.

“There’s no political underpinning," Mustafin said. “We have no intention to offend anyone. Someone at the factory came up with the idea.”

According to the Moscow Times, the ice cream’s packaging was inspired by a Soviet-era cartoon in which little African children inhabited the fictional island of “Chunga-Changa.”

“We just like the name,” said Anatoli Ragimkhanov, financial director of the factory. “It’s so amusing.”

They were told to 'inject' certain stories to boost them on the list, regardless of their popularity, the staffers claims.

And the allegedly left-leaning team are given free rein to bury conservative articles if they have a bias against them, they said.

The bombshell claims were made in a series of anonymous interviews former Facebook staff gave to tech news site Gizmodo on Monday.

One staffer, speaking on the condition of anonymity, told the site: 'I’d come on shift and I’d discover that CPAC or Mitt Romney or Glenn Beck or popular conservative topics wouldn’t be trending because either the curator didn’t recognize the news topic or it was like they had a bias against Ted Cruz.'

On Monday, Facebook hit back at the allegations insisting there are 'guidelines' to prevent bias, laying blame on employees.

The news feed was launched in 2014. It promotes 10 stories to its 167 million users, branding them as must-read topics.

'Black men see gang-rape of babies, daughters and mothers as a pleasurable past-time'

A white South African judge was at the centre of a social media storm after Facebook comments emerged in which she suggested rape was part of black culture.

Political parties rushed to condemn the messages, which sparked fresh outrage after a series of recent internet postings underlined racial tensions in South Africa, 22 years after the end of apartheid rule.

'In their culture a woman is there to pleasure them. Period,' wrote Judge Mabel Jansen, who sits in the High Court in the capital Pretoria. 'It is seen as an absolute right and a woman's consent is not required.'

Jansen added: 'I still have to meet a black girl who was not raped at about 12. I am dead serious.'

The opposition Democratic Alliance party said it would report the messages to the country's Judicial Services Commission to be investigated.

Her comments were 'not only hurtful and demeaning', but undermined 'the dignity of our people,' the party said.

Jansen took to Twitter to defend herself, arguing her postings had been misrepresented.

'What I stated confidentially to somebody in a position to help has been taken completely out of context and referred to specific court cases,' she said.

'The real issue... is the protection of vulnerable women and children and an endeavour to cure the pandemic.'

Official statistics showed that 43,195 rapes were reported in South Africa between April 2014 and March 2015, though most rapes are not reported to police.

From what I have seen and heard about South Africa, there is a lot in what she said. I have visited South Africa both during Apartheid and subsequently. And the subsequent decline in civility was marked. When I was in SA in the '70s, the affluent Jo'burg suburb of Sandton had very little in the way of fences. Now all houses there have 8' high fences topped with razor wire. Does that tell you anything?

Tuesday, May 10, 2016

Wesley College newspaper under fire for publishing 'racist' cartoons drawn by a black student

The independent student newspaper of Delaware's Wesley College is under fire after publishing two cartoons that many students on campus found offensive.

The two cartoons in question were published last Friday. The first shows an African-American woman wearing a 'Black Lives Matter' t-shirt, looking at her watch as she remarks 'Would you look at the time...I'm late for my abortion!'

The second cartoon shows an exchanged between a black man and an animated garden hoe.

The garden hoe exclaims: 'Who is you calling HOE!!!'

'I'm sorry ma'am, you just look like a hoe!' the man responds.

The cartoons were drawn by student Bryheim Muse, who is black himself.

The cartoons quickly generated controversy on campus, with many saying they were offended and found the cartoons racially insensitive.

'I just feel like it's inappropriate, and it kind of offends me,' Tymira Holman, a freshman, told WBOC. 'I know that we have student events where students that aren't minorities feel let out and discriminated again and then something like this is just not OK to me.'

School administrators and the Whetston's editor-in-chief held a forum on Monday to address the outrage over the cartoons, but some students said that wasn't enough.

As an independent student newspaper, The Whetstone is not officially or financially affiliated with the school.

An internal investigation with Jacksonville Sheriff’s Office probed Lt. Trudy Callahan, a 20-year-veteran of the police force, and her Instagram account where she posted an image of a black man lounging on a chain-linked fence.

“Yeah its almost Friday so get your Hood Hammock,” Callahan wrote in a caption from 2015. “Ready to chillax.”

The image went viral on Reddit well before Callahan’s Instagram post. It has been circulating on social media for more than two years without any indicator of where or when it was taken.

Jacksonville Sheriff's Office Lt. Trudy Callahan has been suspended for 10 days for violating the agency's social media policy.

In the wake of racist allegations, Callahan deleted her Instagram account and is now appealing her suspension from the agency, according to the Florida Times-Union.

She believed the posts were “taken out of context” and “twisted and turned to fit people’s agendas,” Callahan said defending herself in a report obtained by the Times-Union.

While none of the images were taken or created by Callahan, she re-shared the pictures with captions that were also interpreted as racially insensitive.

Monday, May 09, 2016

Must not suggest that women have breasts

Newcomer "Doughnut Time" has tried to cover its social media tracks after an outrage at staff uniforms with strategically placed doughnuts.

Doughnut Time founder Damian Griffiths said the T-shirts with doughnuts printed strategically over the breasts had been dumped from its stores four months ago, but on Saturday it wiped them from social media accounts.

"Any imagery that was on our social media accounts and website has been removed based on the feedback from the community which we value greatly," Mr Griffiths said in a statement.

"We apologise to any of our current and past customers who may have taken offence to these T-shirts," he said.

The sprinkle of criticism from Collective Shout - a prominent campaigning movement against the objectification of women and sexualisation of girls - tarnished the company's free doughnut giveaway on Saturday at its store in Brunswick Street, Fitzroy.

What at first seems innocent enough — a Bob Marley-themed image — quickly becomes disturbing. You can don Marley's trademark dreadlocks and Rasta Hat, sure. But the problem is what happens to your skin tone: The filter is clearly blackface.

Blackface has resulted in numerous Halloween controversies for famous celebs, and Snapchat users have already noted the obvious insensitivity of the platform's new filter, which brings this offensive issue to the masses.

In response to request for comment, a Snapchat spokeperson shared the following statement:

"The lens we launched today was created in partnership with the Bob Marley Estate, and gives people a new way to share their appreciation for Bob Marley and his music. Millions of Snapchatters have enjoyed Bob Marley's music, and we respect his life and achievements."

Marley does deserve to be respected and appreciated, but this was not an effective way to do so.

Sunday, May 08, 2016

A Labour activist has been suspended from the party over yet another case of antisemitic social media posts.

David Watson, the fundraising co-ordinator for the Walthamstow Labour Party, has been suspended pending an investigation, a spokesperson told the Jewish Chronicle.

Watson shared articles on Facebook alleging that Daesh has used weapons produced in Israel, and accusing Israel of genocide against the Palestinians.

News of the suspension comes soon after Ken Livingstone once again mentioned Adolf Hitler, this time in his latest interview with Sky News. The former London mayor was suspended by the Labour party last week for comments he made about the Nazi leader — but this hasn’t stopped him.

Asked whether his claim that Hitler was a Zionist was ill-advised, he said: “It is not an unguarded or ill-advised comment to answer a question honestly about historical reality.”

The English language is nothing if not descriptive. But if you are looking to describe something slightly wet, you may want to steer clear of one word in particular - moist.

A study into the common aversion of the word has shown the general disgust it creates may be due to its association to bodily functions, and even related to the facial muscles used to say the word.

Dr Paul Thibodeau, a psychologist from Oberlin College in Ohio, looked at four possible reasons why the word elicited such a strong negative response from people.

One hypothesis is that people just don't like the sound of the word, or that it may be associated with sex and bodily functions.

While one of the more interesting, but controversial, ideas was that it creates 'facial feedback'. The act of saying the word uses the same arrangement of facial muscles as we use to show disgust.

More than 2,400 people were asked to complete questionnaires over the course of five experiments, with initial results revealing almost 18 per cent of people did have an aversion to the word 'moist'. Furthermore, the results showed that aversion was more likely to affect young, neurotic women.

When compared against strongly aversive words, such as 'murderer' or 'vomit', it was found to be fairly benign.

The initial findings indicate the word has become tainted with cultural references, with people linking the word with bodily functions contexts, and so contaminating it.

Dr Thibodeau wrote the findings suggest 'that the prototypical moist-averse person is a young, neurotic, female who is well-educated and somewhat disgusted by bodily function.'

Friday, May 06, 2016

Canadian held for second day after social media criticism of Nepal government

Third world governments tend to be touchy, like Leftists

A Canadian computer programmer who has been vocally critical of the government of Nepal on social media has been held for a second day of questioning, a Nepali official said on Tuesday.

Robert Penner was taken to the Department of Immigration for questioning on Monday by police who arrested him at his office in southern Kathmandu, said Lalitpur Senior Superintendent of Police Pitambar Adhikari.

Penner lives in Kathmandu and works for Sound Cloud, an outsourcing company.

He criticized the Nepal government on social media during unrest that followed the passing of Nepal's constitution last year and he denounced the recent arrest and detention of Kanak Mani Dixit, a prominent journalist and civil rights activist.

"Yesterday we requested the police to bring him to the Department of Immigration for questioning," Prakash Neupane, director of immigration told Reuters.

A TEACHER spoke a word apparently so outrageous, so nauseating, that she was fired from her job. That word? Vagina.

Last week, substitute teacher Allison Wint was leading an art history class at Harper Creek Middle School — a job she had been in since January — while discussing the paintings by George O’Keeffe, according to the Detroit Free Press.

Some of O’Keeffe’s work does actually look like abstract portrayals of the female anatomy, and Wint recalled saying to her class: “Imagine walking into a gallery when (O’Keeffe) was first showing her pieces, and thinking, ‘Am I actually seeing vaginas here, am I a pervert? I’m either a pervert or this woman was a pervert’.”

Wint said she was trying to spark an insightful conversation with her teenage students, using the word vagina about 10 times — which she stressed was never in a vulgar way. But it was deemed inapproriate for 14-15 year-old ears, costing the Michigan woman her job.

She said she hadn’t wanted to use a euphemism, like the often used ‘vajayjay’ or ‘lady bits’, so as to not turn her lesson into a joke.

Thursday, May 05, 2016

"Provider" is a bad word

This Viewpoint discusses issues related to the use of “provider” to describe primary care health professionals with varying levels of training and certification and the effects of these issues on quality of care.

The term “provider” first appeared in the modern health care lexicon as a shorthand referring to delivery entities such as group practices, hospitals, and networks. More recently, its use has expanded to encompass physicians, nurse practitioners (NPs), physician assistants (PAs), and perhaps others, especially those engaged in delivery of primary care.

On one level, this expansion is both logical and convenient, as it reflects the importance of a multidisciplinary approach to modern primary care delivery, extending beyond the traditional dyad of patient and physician.

Being designated as a “primary care provider” also denotes qualifying for payment of services rendered, a designation long sought and highly valued by advanced-practice nurses and PAs.3

Although useful in these contexts, the term “provider” has the potential for adverse consequences for primary care, calling into question the wisdom of its expanded use.

This appeared in a medical journal. The rationale is that the term leads to confusion. If both doctors and nurses are "providers", you might mistake a nurse for a doctor. One would think such mistakes would be rapidly corrected but the writer seems to think not.

Among the controversial remarks that grew the most condemnation, Wilmore said, “Welcome to Negro Night here in Washington. Or as Fox News will report, ‘Two thugs disrupt elegant dinner in DC.'” Wilmore closed out his monologue, saying, “So, Mr. President, I’m going to keep it a hundred. Yo, Barry, you did it, my n***a!”

American Urban Radio Network’s April Ryan asked Earnest what he thought about Wilmore’s use of the n-word.

“I think the first thing that I would observe is that any comedian who signed up to follow President Obama at the White House Correspondents dinner is assuming one of the most difficult tasks in comedy, and just by nature of the engagement, that’s a tough job following the president of the United States,” said Earnest.

“But he crossed the line. Many African-Americans in that room – to include civil rights leaders, black comedians - were very appalled, even members of the Republican Party. Black Republicans were upset. Black Democrats were upset.

Wednesday, May 04, 2016

The UK's broadcasting watchdog will reportedly be given more powers to gag programmes believed to include "unacceptable extremist material" as part of a new crackdown on hate speech.

David Cameron will apparently widen Ofcom's remit and also extend vetting rules so that employers will be informed of "known extremists" in a bid to stop them working with children and other vulnerable groups, The Times reported.

The measures, which also include an independent review of so-called "Sharia courts" in Britain, will make up an Extremism Bill. The draft legislation will reportedly be announced by the prime minister on 18 May and will be included in the Queen's speech.

Clearly, something has to be done about Muslim hostility but kicking the hate preachers out would be preferable. The Left call all sorts of things "hate" but Muslim hate is the real thing, and it does erupt into killings

Tuesday, May 03, 2016

There are some things you must not say, even in satire

A satirical essay by a North County High School student that calls for the destruction of black people is stirring student and community outrage.

In the Advanced Placement Language class at the Glen Burnie school, a teacher assigned students to write a satirical essay modeled after a 1729 essay mocking heartless attitudes toward the less fortunate. "A Modest Proposal" by Jonathan Swift asserted, satirically, that poor people should sell their babies to the rich as food.

One student's satirical essay for the assignment described blacks as "single-parent households, welfare recipients, unemployed citizens..." The essay calls for a nuclear missile to "wipe the cesspool of filth some call a 'race' from the earth."

The essay quickly circulated on social media, with some commenters accusing the student of racism and others defending the satirical intent of the assignment. Anne Arundel County Public Schools spokesman Bob Mosier said he did not know who first posted the essay.

North County Principal Julie Cares sent a letter to parents Tuesday explaining the assignment and said the student's essay was "ill-advised and insensitive."

On April 7, the student whose name is on the essay posted on his Twitter account "TO WHOEVER READ THE PAPER: I do not mean anything in it. I wrote it as a parody for an English assignment, and I apologize for it."

Mosier said the school system sent administrators and counselors Wednesday to help students work through their concerns and anger.

“When reservations were first established, going #OffTheReservation meant you were going to be hunted down and killed,” Ruth Hopkins tweeted.

The social-media firestorm forced Clinton’s campaign to apologize — also on Twitter.

“Divisive language has no place in our politics,” tweeted Amanda Renteria, Clinton’s national political director. “Hillary Clinton meant no disrespect to Native Americans. She wants this election to be about lifting people up, not tearing them down.”

This is, of course, patently absurd. Language derives from human interaction. All words and phrases have an origin, and as time goes by, those words tend to soften in meaning. That is to say, no one says "off the reservation" with an eye towards slandering Native Americans.

Conservatives, and Americans with half a brain realize this, despite the best efforts of Hillary and her ilk to push a radical P.C. agenda. Perhaps now that she's had a taste of her own medicine, she'll see it for what it is: divisive poison.

Monday, May 02, 2016

Farrah Abraham has come under fire after she lashed out at Blac Chyna with a racist comment on Instagram. The former Teen Mom star wrote a bizarre, seemingly unprompted comment on Blac's account on Friday. 'F**kin monkey ewe s**t come up 4 what she is a nothing,' the 24-year-old wrote after Blac shared a video showing off a new lace choker.

But Farah deleted her attack after it set off Blac's fans, who were quick to come to the beauty salon owner's defense.

'Before you degrade somebody else don't forget where you came from,' wrote one commentator. 'Not knocking you but you were Teen Mom, and then became a pornstar or if that's what you like to call yourself! You are no better than anyone, and for you to say something so degrading and so nasty just shows what kind of person you are!'

But the use of "monkey" makes it clear that there was a racial element in the comment. Abraham is a classically beautiful woman of Mediterranean ancestry and appearance, whereas Chyna does have some pronounced African features which Abraham could well see as ugly. See below:

I have read that most African men admire a very large bottom, so her appeal may be mainly to that audience

In a recent press release describing the Justice Department’s efforts to provide housing for rehabilitated juvenile delinquents, the department described the demographic as “Justice-Involved Youth.” From the very fist line of its message, the Office of Public Affairs wrote, “In an effort to help young people involved in the justice system find jobs and housing…”

And this is how we’re introduced to the most recent example of the Left’s newspeak, a strain of our vernacular that George Orwell described as “largely the defence of the indefensible.” Obtuse phrases such as “justice-involved youth” hide the true meaning of what’s happening. Which side of the law are these individuals on? As Investor’s Business Daily facetiously asks, “If these young people are ‘involved’ in the justice system, doesn’t that mean they already have jobs? Like, say, as a trainee in the dispatcher’s office, or a desk clerk in the attorney general’s office, or maybe a janitor at the local courthouse?”

Using the Left’s phrasing, it’s hard to have an honest discussion about the Justice Department’s program. While returning to society after paying a debt to it by spending time in jail is often a difficult task, citizens have the right to know how “involved” these youth were in this nation’s justice system. Are we simply giving out taxpayer funds to hooligans who will turn around and contribute to insecurity and instability of our society? As long as they vote Democrat, yes.

Sunday, May 01, 2016

SALISBURY, Md. – Officials at a Maryland university say black students are behind a drawing of a hanging stick figure with a racial slur found on a library whiteboard.

News outlets quote Salisbury University spokesman Richard Culver as saying the students are black. He declined to identify them, citing privacy rules. The image found April 10 on a whiteboard showed a stick figure being hanged. It was labeled with a racial slur and accompanied by the hashtag "whitepower."

Culver says university police consulted with prosecutors and decided not to file criminal charges at this time. He says if the university determines any of the school's policies were violated, the students could face disciplinary action.

If there is any person or group of people that should understand the difference between free speech and hate speech, it is a Harvard Law student. Three years of legal classes at an elite institution along with basic human decency should be enough to not broadcast discriminatory views in public.

But that’s not the America we live in now. The false notion that everyone’s ideas are equally valuable—even if they’re chock-full of anti-Semitic conspiracy theory nonsense—now pervades higher education, hate speech, and it appears to be becoming more permissible. Perhaps it’s the fashionable white guilt or the faux self-awareness, but hate speech is creeping into (gulp) “safe spaces”.

“OK, my question is for Tzipi Livni,” the student asked. “Um, how is it that you are so smelly?” When the moderator of the panel asked for clarification, the student pressed on: “I’m [asking about] Tzipi Livni, very smelly.” The reaction seemed to turn from confusion to consternation. The implication of the question was painfully obvious: the student was indirectly calling her a smelly Jew. There’s no other conclusion that can be derived. Publicly asking about someone’s odor is obviously not a passing curiosity about hygiene. It’s an ethnic slur.

Fortunately the campus reaction was swift. Harvard Law’s dean Martha Minow released a statement that the question “violated the sense of trust and respect we expect in our community.” The student is a leader of the Justice for Palestine chapter at Harvard Law and made a public apology during which he said that he would “never, ever, call anyone, under any circumstances, a ‘smelly Jew’.” Of course, the apology does not explain why he felt compelled to ask about Livni’s alleged smelliness in the first place.

What’s disturbing about this whole scandal is that the student felt safe enough to ask such a ridiculous and personal question. Countless blogs and videos and articles about checking your privilege and hours of required diversity training didn’t stop him.

Is the American national anthem politically incorrect? From the 4th verse:Praise the Power that hath made and preserved us a nation.
Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just,
And this be our motto: "In God is our trust."

Mohammad

The truth can be offensive to some but it must be said

"HATE SPEECH" is free speech: The U.S. Supreme Court stated the general rule regarding protected speech in Texas v. Johnson (109 S.Ct. at 2544), when it held: "The government may not prohibit the verbal or nonverbal expression of an idea merely because society finds the idea offensive or disagreeable." Federal courts have consistently followed this. Said Virginia federal district judge Claude Hilton: "The First Amendment does not recognize exceptions for bigotry, racism, and religious intolerance or ideas or matters some may deem trivial, vulgar or profane."

Even some advocacy of violence is protected by the 1st Amendment. In Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969), the U.S. Supreme Court held unanimously that speech advocating violent illegal actions to bring about social change is protected by the First Amendment "except where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action."

The double standard: Atheists can put up signs and billboards saying that Christianity is wrong and that is hunky dory. But if a Christian says that homosexuality is wrong, that is attacked as "hate speech"

One for the militant atheists to consider: "...it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg" -- Thomas Jefferson

"I think no subject should be off-limits, and I regard the laws in many Continental countries criminalizing Holocaust denial as philosophically repugnant and practically useless – in that they confirm to Jew-haters that the Jews control everything (otherwise why aren’t we allowed to talk about it?)" -- Mark Steyn

Voltaire's most famous saying was actually a summary of Voltaire's thinking by one of his biographers rather than something Voltaire said himself. Nonetheless it is a wholly admirable sentiment: "I disagree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it". I am of a similar mind.

The traditional advice about derogatory speech: "Sticks and stones will break your bones but names will never hurt you". Apparently people today are not as emotionally robust as their ancestors were.

Why conservatives should not respond to Leftist abuse: "Never wrestle with a pig, because you'll both just get dirty, and the pig likes it.”

The KKK were members of the DEMOCRATIC party. Google "Klanbake" if you doubt it

A phobia is an irrational fear, so the terms "Islamophobic" and "homophobic" embody a claim that the people so described are mentally ill. There is no evidence for either claim. Both terms are simply abuse masquerading as diagnoses and suggest that the person using them is engaged in propaganda rather than in any form of rational or objective discourse.

Leftists often pretend that any mention of race is "racist" -- unless they mention it, of course. But leaving such irrational propaganda aside, which statements really are racist? Can statements of fact about race be "racist"? Such statements are simply either true or false. The most sweeping possible definition of racism is that a racist statement is a statement that includes a negative value judgment of some race. Absent that, a statement is not racist, for all that Leftists might howl that it is. Facts cannot be racist so nor is the simple statement of them racist. Here is a statement that cannot therefore be racist by itself, though it could be false: "Blacks are on average much less intelligent than whites". If it is false and someone utters it, he could simply be mistaken or misinformed.

Categorization is a basic human survival skill so racism as the Left define it (i.e. any awareness of race) is in fact neither right nor wrong. It is simply human

Whatever your definition of racism, however, a statement that simply mentions race is not thereby racist -- though one would think otherwise from American Presidential election campaigns. Is a statement that mentions dogs, "doggist" or a statement that mentions cats, "cattist"?

If any mention of racial differences is racist then all Leftists are racist too -- as "affirmative action" is an explicit reference to racial differences

Was Abraham Lincoln a racist? "You and we are different races. We have between us a broader difference than exists between almost any other two races. Whether it is right or wrong I need not discuss, but this physical difference is a great disadvantage to us both, as I think your race suffer very greatly, many of them by living among us, while ours suffer from your presence. In a word, we suffer on each side. If this be admitted, it affords a reason at least why we should be separated. It is better for both, therefore, to be separated." -- Spoken at the White House to a group of black community leaders, August 14th, 1862

Gimlet-eyed Leftist haters sometimes pounce on the word "white" as racist. Will the time come when we have to refer to the White House as the "Full spectrum of light" House?

The spirit of liberty is "the spirit which is not too sure that it is right." and "Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women; when it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can even do much to help it. While it lies there it needs no constitution, no law, no court to save it." -- Judge Learned Hand

Mostly, a gaffe is just truth slipping out

Two lines below of a famous hymn that would be incomprehensible to Leftists today ("honor"? "right"? "freedom?" Freedom to agree with them is the only freedom they believe in)

First to fight for right and freedom,
And to keep our honor clean

It is of course the hymn of the USMC -- still today the relentless warriors that they always were.

It seems a pity that the wisdom of the ancient Greek philosopher Epictetus is now little known. Remember, wrote the Stoic thinker, "that foul words or blows in themselves are no outrage, but your judgment that they are so. So when any one makes you angry, know that it is your own thought that has angered you. Wherefore make it your endeavour not to let your impressions carry you away."

"Since therefore the knowledge and survey of vice is in this world so necessary to the constituting of human virtue, and the scanning of error to the confirmation of truth, how can we more safely, and with less danger, scout into the regions of sin and falsity than by reading all manner of tractates, and hearing all manner of reason?" -- English poet John Milton (1608-1674) in Areopagitica

Leftists can try to get you fired from your job over something that you said and that's not an attack on free speech. But if you just criticize something that they say, then that IS an attack on free speech

The intellectual Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius (AD 121-180) could have been speaking of much that goes on today when he said: "The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."

I despair of the ADL. Jews have enough problems already and yet in the ADL one has a prominent Jewish organization that does its best to make itself offensive to Christians. Their Leftism is more important to them than the welfare of Jewry -- which is the exact opposite of what they ostensibly stand for! Jewish cleverness seems to vanish when politics are involved. Fortunately, Christians are true to their saviour and have loving hearts. Jewish dissatisfaction with the myopia of the ADL is outlined here. Note that Foxy was too grand to reply to it.

There are also two blogspot blogs which record what I think are my main recent articles here and here. Similar content can be more conveniently accessed via my subject-indexed list of short articles here or here (I rarely write long articles these days)

NOTE: The archives provided by blogspot below are rather inconvenient. They break each month up into small bits. If you want to scan whole months at a time, the backup archives will suit better. See here or here